Rane Tool Co., Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Aug 14, 1945

63 N.L.R.B. 352 (N.L.R.B. 1945)

In the Matter of BANE TOOL COMPANY, INC. and RANE INDEPENDENT
UNION
Case No. 3-R-997.-Decided August 14, 194.5
Mr. Clive L. Wright, of Jamestown, N. Y., for the Company.
Mr. Michael D. Lombardo, of Jamestown, N. Y., for the
Independent.
Mr. Willard Bliss, of Syracuse, N. Y., for the U. E.
Mr. Joseph D. Manders, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon a petition duly filed by Rane Independent Union, herein called
the Independent, alleging that a question affecting commerce, had
arisen concerning the representation of employees of Rane Tool Com-
pany, Inc., Jamestown, New York, herein called the Company, the
National Labor Relations Board provided for an appropriate hearing
upon due notice before Eugene von Wellsheim, Trial Examiner. Said
hearing was held at Jamestown, New York, on June 8, 1945. The
Company, the Independent, and United Electrical Radio & Machine
Workers of America, C. I. 0.,1 herein called the U. E., appeared and
participated. All parties were afforded full opportunity to be heard,
to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evidence
bearing on the, issues. At the hearing, the U. E. moved for a dismissal
of the instant petition. For reasons set forth in Sections II and III,
infra, the motion is denied. The Trial Examiner's rulings made at the
hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. All
parties were afforded an opportunity to file briefs with the Board.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
Rane Tool Company, 'Inc., a New York corporation, is engaged in
the manufacture of tools, such as dies, punch press dies , jigs, fixtures,
1 At the bearing , the U. E - s oral motion to intervene was granted.
63 N. L. R. 13, No. 51.
352
BANE TOOL COMPANY, INC. 353
and special machinery. At the present time, its entire production out-
put is pursuant to war contracts. The Company's sole plant, located
at Jamestown, New York, is involved in the instant proceeding. Dur-
ing the 12=month period ending June 1, 1945, the Company purchased
raw materials valued in excess of $177,000, approximately 28 percent
of which was shipped from points outside the State of New York.
During the same period, the Company manufactured finished prod-
ucts valued in excess of $916,000, 38 percent of which was shipped to
points outside the State of New York.
The Company admits that its operations affect commerce within the
meaning of the National Labor Relations Act, and we so find.
II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
Rane Independent Union is a labor organization admitting to mem-
bership employees of the Company.'
United Electrical, Radio & Machine Workers of America, affiliated
with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, is a labor organization
admitting to membership employees of the Company.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
On or about May 2, 1945, the Independent presented the Company
with evidence of its representation in the alleged appropriate unit
and requested recognition as the exclusive collective bargaining repre-
sentative of the employees involved herein. The Company refused to
grant recognition to the Independent until it is certified by the Board
in an appropriate units
Pursuant to a consent election, won by the U. E.,4 the Company and
the U. E. entered into a collective bargaining agreement on May 9, 1944.
The agreement provided for automatic renewal from year to year
unless terminated by either party "at least thirty (30) days before
the next annual expiration date . . ." The Company terminated the
agreement on or about April 5, 1945.5 The agreement covered, inter
alia, wages, overtime rates, hours of employment, vacations, seniority,
2 At the hearing , the U. E. moved to dismiss the instant petition on the ground that the
Independent is not a labor organization within the meaning of the Act The record before
us, including the bylaws of the Independent , which were submitted in evidence, clearly
demonstrates that Rane Independent Union is a labor organization "NNhicb exists for the
purpose, in whole or in part , of dealing with employees concerning grievances , labor dis-
putes , wages, rates of pay, hours of employment , or conditions of work." we find the
motion to be without merit ; and it is herewith denied.
3 As a further ground for refusal at that time, the Company referred to the existence
of its contract with the U . E. Nihich did not terminate until May 9, 1945
This election was conducted by the Regional Director in November 1943
The U . E requested the Company to extend the agreement beyond May 9, 1945, the
termination date, but the Company refused to accede. The Company ' s timely communica-
tion to the U. E. prevents such agreement fioni opeiatmg as a bar to an immediate deter-
mination of representatives
354 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
and grievance procedures, but omitted consideration of automatic wage
progressions with established wage bracket classifications, about which
the parties were in dispute.6 That dispute was submitted to the Second
Regional War Labor Board, which, on November 14, 1944, issued a
Directive Order ,7 requiring the parties to negotiate and establish,
either by agreement or arbitration, a system of merit wage increases
for the employees of the Company. On November 27, 1944, the Com-
pany filed a petition for review of the above Directive Order with the
National War Labor Board. Subsequently, on May 8, 1945, the
National War Labor Board issued a Directive Order, affirming with
some modification, the order issued by the Regional Board.
The U. E. contends that its voluntary utilization of the orderly
processes of the War Labor Board has deprived the employees of the
Company of the enjoyment of the "most essential part of its entire
collective bargaining agreement"; and, therefore, under the doctrine
enunciated in Matter of Allis-C/ra mers Manufacturing Company s
and cases following it, the Independent's petition should be dismissed.
We find no merit in this contention. The issue involved in the War
Labor Board dispute has not interfered unduly with the contractual
program initiated by the U. E.9 On the contrary, the employees of the
Company have received practically all of the fundamental benefits
usually associated with collective bargaining.10 Under these circum-
stances, we are of the opinion that the U. E. has had sufficient oppor-
tunity to demonstrate its effectiveness as a collective bargaining repre-
sentative, and must now look to the employees, themselves, for
affirmation of its role as their collective bargaining representative.
We hereby deny the U. E.'s motion to dismiss the petition 11
A statement of a Board agent, introduced into evidence at the hear-
ing, indicates that the Independent represents a substantial number
of employees in the unit hereinafter found appropriate.12
0 At the heating, counsel foi the Company stated that the Company was presently oper-
ating under it wage' classification Si stem which had been established for the employees of
the Company by the National War Labor Board
T Matter of Rane Tool Company, Inc, 19 War Labor Reports 936, Case No 111-7546-D.
$ 50 N L It B 306
0 Note contents of agreement outlined sups a
The War Labor Board's order contains its customary provision as to ietioactivity of
wage adjustments The retroactive date provided is May 9, 1944, and, therefore, is coin-
cident with the inception of the U E's contract.
10Cf. Matter of American-Marsh Pumps, Inc, 59 N L It B 1084, Mutter of Taylor
Foi qc it Pipe iVoi ta, 58 N L R B 1375
11 See Matter of Federal Screiv Works, 61 N L R. B 387, Matter of Great Lakes Carbon
Corporation, 57 N L. It B 115, Matter of Michigan Light Allogs Corp , 58 N L It B 113
"'The Field Examiner reported that the Independent submitted 73 authorization cards,
69 of which bore apparently genuine original signatures of persons listed on the Company's
pay roll of April 29, 1945, Much contained the names of 130 employees in the alleged appro-
piiato unit and that 69 of the cards were undated
The U E submitted its current contract as evidence of its representation in the alleged
appropriate unit.
RANE TOOL COMPANY, INC. 355
We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning
the representation of employees of the Company, within the meaning
of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The Independent contends that all production and maintenance
employees, including draftsmen, but excluding office and clerical
employees, executives, foremen, and all other supervisory employees,
constitute the appropriate unit 73 The Company desires to remain
neutral, and, therefore, takes no position as to the composition of the
unit. The U. E. advanced no objection to the above specified inclusions
and exclusions. However, there remain for disposition the following
categories of employees :
Assistant foremen: There are approximately five such employees.
In the absence of the foreman, the assistant foreman has the authority
to supervise the quality of the work performed by his coworkers,"'
but does not exercise the authority to hire, discharge, or effectively
recommend changes in the status of these workers. The assistant fore-
men devote approximately 75 percent of their time to the performance
of manual tasks; their remaining time is devoted to the type of super-
visory activity described above. Both assistant foremen and produc-
tion workers receive an hourly rate of pay. Vacations, sick leave,
and other working conditions are also substantially the same for both
types of employees. It appears that assistant foremen were included
in the previous bargaining unit.15 The Independent urges the in-
clusion of the assistant foremen; the U. E. urges their exclusion.
We find that these employees do not possess supervisory authority
within the meaning of our customary definition; and we shall, there-
fore, include assistant foremen in the appropriate unit.
Plant guard: The Company employs one guard,16 who supervises
the entrance and exit of authorized persons to and from the plant, and
also patrols the entire plant. The guard wears a uniform, but he is
not armed or deputized, nor does he exercise any monitorial authority.
Heretofore the guard has been militarized and armed, and because of
this fact was excluded from the previous bargaining unit, but he is
no longer militarized. Upon the basis of the above facts, we shall
include the plant guard in the appropriate unit.17
11 This unit is substantially the same as the one for which the U. E. bargained.
14 Such employee does not possess the authority to "shut -down" a machine whose opera-
tion is not meeting company standards
15 The U E, contending that such employees were excluded from the contract unit,
offered no evidence to substantiate this contention On the other hand , a company wit-
ness testified that the name of an assistant foreman was included in a list containing the
names of U E members in good standing.
19 This employee is also termed a "watchman
IT See Afattei of Dortch Stoic Works, 52 N. L R B 1450
662514-46-vol 63-24
356 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
We find that all production and maintenance employees including
draftsmen, the plant guard and assistant foremen, but excluding office
and clerical employees, executives, foremen, and any other supervisory
employees with authority to hire, promote, discharge, discipline, or
otherwise effect changes in the status of employees, or effectively rec-
ommend such action, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes
of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the
Act.
V. TFIE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
We shall direct that the question concerning representation which
has arisen be resolved by an election by secret ballot among the em-
ployees in the appropriate unit who were employed during the pay-
roll period immediately preceding the date of the Direction of Elec-
tion herein, subject to the limitations and additions set forth in the
Direction.18
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
By virtue of and pursuant to the power vested in the National Labor
Relations Board by Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act,
and pursuant to Article III, Section 9, of National Labor Relations
Board Rules and Regulations-Series 3, as amended, it is hereby
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain representa-
tives for the purposes of collective bargaining with Rane Tool Com-
pany, Inc., Jamestown, New York, an election by secret ballot shall be
conducted as early as possible, but not later than thirty (30) days from
the date of this Direction, under the direction and supervision of the
Regional Director for the Third Region, acting in this matter as agent
for the National Labor Relations Board, and subject to Article III,
Sections 10 and 11, of said Rules and Regulations, among the em-
ployees in the unit found appropriate in Section IV, above, who were
employed during the pay-roll period immediately preceding the date
of this Direction, including employees who did not work during said
pay-roll period because they were ill or on vacation or temporarily
laid off, and including employees in the armed forces of the United
States who present themselves in person at the polls, but excluding
those employees who have since quit or been discharged for cause and
have not been rehired or reinstated prior to the date of the election,
to determine whether they desire to be represented by Rane Independ-
ent Union or by United Electrical, Radio & Machine Workers of
America, C. I. 0., for the purposes of collective bargaining, or by
neither.
MR. GERARD D. REILLY took no part in the consideration of the
above Decision and Direction of Election.
16 The request of the U E to be designated on the ballot in a manner other than as set
forth in the Direction of Election is hereby referred to the Regional Director.